Randy Kramer wrote:
>On Monday 12 September 2005 04:11 pm, Jamey Cribbs wrote:
>
>
>>>If one-to-many links are not symmetrical, that's the best reason
>>>of all I'll never use them.
>>>
>>>
>
>There are (some) other people paying (some) attention.
>
>In a traditional relational database system, what goes in can come out, and
>I'm not sure that anyting different is being proposed here (but I may be
>confused).
>
>Aside: One-to-many links are inherently not symmetrical, and I don't know what
>is meant by storing something in the "one-to-many" link.
>
>The one to many link is typically accomplished by keys. If a one to many link
>exists, it is because a record in on table contains a key (to indicate
>linking) to another table wherein multiple records with the same key are
>allowed. Hence you have a record in one table that relates to (or can relate
>to) multiple records in the other table.
>
>Is there something different going on in KirbyBase?
>
>
Nope. That's pretty much how it works in KirbyBase.
Jamey